I've put up a patch showing what would change at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1583377 / https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D46869.
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 2:53 PM Brian Grinstead <bgrinst...@mozilla.com> wrote: > We have 5 non-test consumers of <xul:page> in m-c right now: > https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/search?q=%3Cpage&path=.xul. > > According to > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Archive/Mozilla/XUL/page, the > xul:page element is "similar to a window, except it should be used for XUL > files that are to be loaded into an iframe." > > But the only handling for page beyond being a generic XUL element I see is: > > * One relevant match on nsGkAtoms::page > https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/search?q=symbol:_ZN9nsGkAtoms4pageE&redirect=false > that lumps it in with other root xul elements at > https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/153feabebc2d13bb4c29ef8adf104ec1ebd246ae/layout/xul/nsBoxFrame.cpp#953 > . > * Some CSS, but all of this applies to <window> and other roots as well: > https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/search?q=%5Epage&case=false®exp=true&path=.css > . > > So, I'd like to find out if there's a reason we couldn't migrate the > consumers directly to <window> (with the ultimate goal of then migrating > those to <html>). Am I missing anything? > > Thanks, > Brian _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
